I really ought to know better than to question the specificity of any Lovecraftian reference. #lose[d100]SAN

i thought it was the key and guardian of the Gate?

sounds crazy!

yep, i found out just how not-so-consistently-wet Seattle had been* after I moved to far-flung.... Olympia for ~8 years. then I'd be home for winter breaks and think "damn, it's dry and cold..."

the uncomfortable tangent I prefer to avoid rabbitting(?) down is the notion of validating the coping mechanisms of people who supposedly gain comfort from the ilk of gooey-facebook-display dubious *pathy...

this article wouldn't bother me if I actually had confidence in the biological literacy of more than maybe 2% of the audience. please, go find out exactly how many reasons there are that we need fat.

so, an admirably less-expensive alternative to atrocities like whatever the Gellar/Philippe/et al. rip-off of Dangerous Liaisons was called?

I was about to turn 4 and not in a group, so I doubt I had any alone time in any stranger's house.

the very you fact you say: "what you are arguing you should be able to revise in the historical record" suggest that some items in history should be off limit to revisiting as additional data surfaces.

Yeah, I'm not interested in defending anybody here, but I don't really buy the "surely several accomplished athletes from different places couldn't all be so clueless about a" or "but isn't it suspicious that a celebrity would have a private picture taken with another celebrity?" lines.

how very curious: you respond directly, yet seem to ignore the

yeah, david ives is good, but he's not invent-that-concept good.

i empathize with that sentiment, but whether the one you grabbed was a clueless tool, a spiteful tool, a misguided fellow with actual trauma in his past, or even a ringleading sociopath who rings the "i'm standing up for you, brah" like a pro, actually doing that to them would be playing right into the hands of the…

this.

you meant 'proponent', cleverdick.

i hope he harbors no delusion that he's the next MauryCompson.

why not spitball the evolution of the male 'quickie' into something more respectable? seems like that'd solve an issue or two.

ostrich is pretty damn red.

agreed, but it's "tenet". #losingbattle

fair enough that i seem to, since i jumped on a rather isolated bit of that exchange. i don't generally have the confusion you specify, though. thanks for not flaming, and thanks for taking the time to type an extra sentence or two. i am one of those outliers who genuinely appreciates it.